Nearly 10,000 developers from more than 1,000 companies have contributed to the Linux kernel since tracking began in 2005. Just since the last report, more than 1,100 developers from 225 companies have contributed to the kernel. In fact, more developers and companies are contributing to Linux than ever before with Linux kernel 3.10 seeing the most developer contributions ever.

Mobile and embedded companies are increasing their investments in Linux. Linaro, Samsung and Texas Instruments together increased their aggregate contributions from 4.4 percent during the previous version of the paper to 11 percent of all changes this year. Google’s contributions are also up significantly this year.

The Top 10 organizations sponsoring Linux kernel development since the last report include Red Hat, Intel, Texas Instruments, Linaro, SUSE, IBM, Samsung, Google, Vision Engraving Systems Consultants and Wolfson Microelectronics. After appearing on the list for the first time in 2012, Microsoft notably dropped off the list entirely this year. A complete list of the top 30 organizations sponsoring this work is included in the paper.

The rate of Linux development is unmatched. The average number of changes accepted into the kernel per hour is 7.14, which translates to 171 changes every day and more than 1,200 per week.

does that matter? He still maintains the repo, still performs the merges, still does the quality control, still determines the direction of future updates. As Slashdot is fond of saying, the quality of a developer isn't just determined by the number of lines or commits he contributes.

I don't know why that bit about Torvalds is even necessary, unless someone is trying to take a swipe at him. Again.

Or you could just take note that Linus is becoming more of a manager than a raw code producer.

Of course, this is completely normal and part of the process a developer goes through in their lives as they progress through their stages.

Its just something to note, no need to get all offended, especially since we're not even talking about you, Fanboy. Linus will eventually stop writing code for Linux all together for any number of reasons, including the inevitable death.

Pull your panties out of your crack and move on. No one is insulting your God.

Its just something to note, no need to get all offended, especially since we're not even talking about you, Fanboy. Linus will eventually stop writing code for Linux all together for any number of reasons, including the inevitable death.

Pull your panties out of your crack and move on. No one is insulting your God.

Calling someone a fanboy with all the abusive tone of Linus Torvalds. How ironic.

Just FYI, I'm not at all attached to Linus or the manner in which he conducts himself towards others...but the continual complaints and passive aggressive swipes can be even more tiring and petty than the man himself. Linus is just not all that big a deal. In what world is the statement "so-and-so has fallen out of the top 100 contributors, ALL THE WAY to 101st!" news? Why are we even talking about him, again? That's my questio

"Calling someone a fanboy with all the abusive tone of Linus Torvalds. How ironic."

Yeah. I don't think you get the difference. When Linus gets "abusive" as you call it, the person on the receiving end almost always deserves it. That is fundamentally different than what is going on with this guy.

" the continual complaints and passive aggressive swipes can be even more tiring and petty than the man himself. "

Linus is actually what we would commonly refer to in the intellectual world the exact opposite of p

Well damn it, did netcraft finally confirm *BSD is dead? Did it take IIS and Apple-server with it too?

Call someone to complain that you can no longer use the internet then... that should work! Damn, you or the person you were going to call has an Android phone!

Yeah, because we didn't have either custom phone OSes or WinCE / WinMobile before. Or if in your "non-linux" world Apple wouldn't dominate the phone market... if Apple was the only phone OS maker I'm sure they would license o/sX to anyone who could prove decent hardware compatibility just to grab as much money as possible; app store purchases alone would be astronomical orders of magnitude larger that w

"Well damn it, did netcraft finally confirm *BSD is dead? Did it take IIS and Apple-server with it too?"

Allow me to explain how the internet works! Your packets have to get from your machine to the BSD based server or IIS based server and back again. If you could run a cable directly to those servers, you'd be golden, but you can't now can you. That means your data gets handled by Linux even if it is served from a BSD machine to your Windows box.

Let's break this down into little words you can understand:Your claim is any device currently running Linux / Embedded Linux right now wouldn't exist in any way shape or form if Linus hadn't made the kernel. My claim is any device currently running Linux / Embedded Linux would have an analogous device running another form of OS / Embedded OS if Linus never existed.

Lets examine a little deeper:

Ok. Now that we have straightened out that little cognitive distortion you were clearly experiencing, lets look back to everything else you wrote, modify it to the present tense, and see if you can still say any of it. Go ahead. I'll wait.

"Your claim is any device currently running Linux / Embedded Linux right now wouldn't exist in any way shape or form if Linus hadn't made the kernel."

I never made any such claim, and you are a bona fide moron. I didn't bother to read the rest of your idiocy. When you pass an elementary school English course you will learn the difference between can't and couldn't.

> if Apple was the only phone OS maker I'm sure they would license o/sX to anyone who could prove decent hardware compatibility

A few years ago, Apple had the only credible smartphone OS. They didn't license their smartphone OS when they were the only one. Instead they gave the majority of market share to a company who DID license their OS.

Is that a mistake they would only make once? For several years they had the only GUI OS for desktop computers. Rather than license it, they left every other manufactu

Or you could just take note that Linus is becoming more of a manager than a raw code producer.

Of 1100+ developers he's in 101st, that's what still in the top 10%? Granted many of those won't be full time but many of them will too, some of them developers that do nothing but crank out code. The real story here is that the day has only 24 hours and with more full time developers joining up Linus is pushed down. Not to mention more developers means more code is pushed upstream to the subsystem maintainers and eventually to Linus so there's more to review as well which is also a form of digging into the

"Or you could just take note that Linus is becoming more of a manager than a raw code producer."

The number of participants continues to grow and the commit rate continues to accelerate. It therefore doesn't follow that he is becoming more of a manager. He could increase his output and still "fall" to number 101.

"Of course, this is completely normal and part of the process a developer goes through in their lives as they progress through their stages."

The number of participants continues to grow and the commit rate continues to accelerate. It therefore doesn't follow that he is becoming more of a manager. He could increase his output and still "fall" to number 101.

What? You're telling me that being the guy who does all the merges ISN'T managing? Or that from now until the end of time, there will be faster and faster committers? That makes no sense. Adding more committers doesn't make him slower or them magically faster.

You are confusing being a benevolent project dictator with holding a job at a typical company.

So I'm guessing you've never managed a software project in your life. Managing a project is managing a project, be it open source or ultra secret proprietary NSA work. You seem to have some silly fantasy about Linux being magically different than

"What? You're telling me that being the guy who does all the merges ISN'T managing?"

There isn't a person on the planet who understands software that calls that managing.

" Adding more committers doesn't make him slower or them magically faster."

It makes perfect sense. More samples means you might still be on the same point of the curve, but the number of points above you on the curve will increase. You are just unable to understand how statistics work.

I can not offend you, but you or he can take offense. Thats your problem, not mine.

That's just a way of dodging responsibility for your words and actions. You can offend somebody if you mean offense, and you meant offense. Internet pseudo-anonymity doesn't change the fact that you were acting like an asshole to someone whose motivations you have no idea about (FYI: far from fanboy). Get off your high horse.

Despite my previous response, you still haven't told me how exactly I was being a fanboy. There is precedent for silly passive aggressive swipes against Linus Torvalds on Slashdot...rem

Or you could just take note that Linus is becoming more of a manager than a raw code producer.

Of course, this is completely normal and part of the process a developer goes through in their lives as they progress through their stages.

Its just something to note, no need to get all offended, especially since we're not even talking about you, Fanboy. Linus will eventually stop writing code for Linux all together for any number of reasons, including the inevitable death.

Pull your panties out of your crack and move on. No one is insulting your God.

Do you always blow a tampon when someone expresses their discontent with an author's presumed attitude? Did I effectively express that you are a bitch for being so insulting?

does that matter? He still maintains the repo, still performs the merges, still does the quality control, still determines the direction of future updates. As Slashdot is fond of saying, the quality of a developer isn't just determined by the number of lines or commits he contributes.

Actually I think Linus has enough work with all that. He probably wouldn't even have time to do much coding.

There is no other person who has led as large and successful a software project for as long as Linus has with as much involvement as Linus has. I think that pretty much makes him the greatest software development manager of all time. It also means that those who criticize his management style need to pony up more than just their opinions.

Lines of code is not a good measure. It's a very constructive commit if you replace 30 lines of code with 3 that do the same thing. Yet by a LOC measure that would be a retrograde step.

Or look at it another way, suppose you had to projects that do the same thing. Say two C compilers that both meet the latest spec, and produce equally efficient code. But one had 10 times the LOC as the other. The better one would be the smaller one.

17 MLOC for a kernel is ridiculous. Even Torvalds admits it's far too big. On

guido not an asshole? he put in python all the whitespace shit. he is a gigantic asshole.

there's plenty of sw projects that have been going on for far longer for sure but not any that has had the same impact, even if there's even some that fill almost the same purpose.

the less the software matters the easier it is to "not be an asshole" about it. besides, it's just management by perkele. he hasn't been a real asshole to anyone - if you want you can ask a politicians scriptwriter to translate the sentences i

That would be an excellent contrary example if it were not for the fact that it doesn't come close to qualifying as an example. First of all, you can't possibly be claiming that Python is as large a project, or as pervasive. Secondly, you are confusing the fact that most people have never heard of someone because they are very low profile with the fact that people will get jealous and call a famous person they have never met an asshole.

"Largeness of source is a flaw of the Linux kernel not a plus point. "

So you are saying you have no idea what you are talking about. I can accept that. The largeness of the source is due to the fact that it targets more than 30 architectures, and has thousands of features, each which can be compiled in or left out based on the needs of the target. Furthermore, one can choose from hundreds of tuning options.

Is English your second language? Calling it a flaw isn't the same as Linus saying it would be easier to manage the codebase if it wasn't so big. As usual, you are nothing but a clueless wanker who cannot read and/or understand even the most basic language constructs and concepts.

I don't blame you. I'd be embarrassed and trying to deflect the attention elsewhere if I made the kind of statements that you made too. To save you time and face, don't worry about it. I accept your apology.

I think that pretty much makes him the greatest software development manager of all time.

Automatically, when anyone makes these kinds of statements, I consider Stallman as well. Linux wouldn't have gotten very far without a compiler, and my understanding is that gcc was basically the only compiler around at the time (you know what I mean - icc, etc. don't count). And of course, you could also make a claim that it was all of Stallman's work with GNU that kept Linux and many other projects open instead of being overtaken by greedy interests and left to die in obscurity.

While all of this makes for a great debate, it's of course always going to be very subjective and there's never any real answer. I'm sure that there are many others that could also go in here as well (Larry Wall, Ritchie, Kernighan, and so on).

Humm, in terms of Open Source, you're probably right but I think you'll find that most guys looking for career advancement wouldn't hang around just doing merges and maintaining control of the project ad-nausea. I think what you're seeing here is the fear that if Mr. Torvalds steps away from his project it would fail, the contrary should be true that if he does step away that there are others that can fulfill what he's doing now. To each his own but if I was doing the same repetitive thing over and over f

I have as much of a mixed environment as anyone (2 Android Tablets, 1 android phone, 1 win8 desktop, 1 win8 laptop, 1 win7 tablet, 1 linux desktop), so I really have no preference one way or the other. However, the "funny" moderation of your post aside, as a developer, I think it's a bit unfair to categorize MS developers this way. After all, they were only writing what management told them to.

On one weekend in 2007, over two million *nix desktops were booted for the first time. It just so happened that *nix was BSD based, and had an Apple GUI. The year of the "Linux" desktop was the year of OSX. Not the kernel we hoped for, but a mainstream POSIX system that will run all your GPL code.

Then in 2010, millions of new systems had the Linux kernel. Today, MOST new computers have Linux installed. By 2010, the ubiquitous consumer PC had

I wouldn't say he's first. He's just the most publicized. Theo from OpenBSD is pretty bad and a quick glance over the Debian mailing lists will blow your mind. Linus is bad but there are far worse offenders than him.

I dunno about the specific developers at Ubutnu, but the reason that Ubuntu exists, other than being pissed at Debian's long release cycle, is because everyone was really sick and tired of the fragmentation that user-grade Linux distros were presenting. "What distro should I use?" isn't a question you want newbies to have to ask. "Well that depends on what distro you're using" isn't a response that I should have to give to my grandmother running Linux for the first time. Ubuntu have a nice solid STANDARD platform and interface for non-techy users to become familiar with.

Your whole post is ridiculous. Ubuntu was never a good option, and certainly doesn't provide a better solution than Mandriva or Mageia. They also deviate from standards like it is a South African pastime.

Well yeah, and there's the fact that most people couldn't care less about the politics. I can't speak for anyone's grandparents, but I've been using Ubuntu for years - by choice - because it works, it's fast, and I like the way it looks. Why people can't accept that, I'll never know. For one reason or another, in the Linux community, if you proclaim to like a popular distro, other people take it as a personal attack or something.

Maybe an even more important point they contributed is a large community. Cannonical took many years to build that up by marketing, providing infrastructure (forums, launchpad) and hand-picking the various pieces software that makes an distribution of things that work well together. This has several advantages: First, more users means more testing, more bug-reports and more people that can help you in a forum. Secondly, a large community means they created a critical mass to pressure hardware vendors to rel

Canonical isn't going to have a kernel team like the competition; their focus is the desktop side. Oracle is the surprise failure. They've complained before that their expertise rivals Red Hat, but this report appears to disagree.

Semiconductor production is hardly a niche market. Sure, you might not hear about them much, but Sun, IBM, Lenovo, Intel, Samsung, Apple, Google, and all the others have to go somewhere for their hardware. Why re-invent the wheel at significant cost when TI and Motorola already have a production line for what you need?

Well, I have looked at Wolfson - they specialize in audio (yes including silicon). Still find it interesting that they contribute to linux kernel along IBM's and Googles of the world. And Vision Engraving? Is this the same company: http://www.visionengravers.com/ [visionengravers.com]?

Wow - this seem such a niche market companies (with all due respect) for making top 10 contribution to linux kernel - interesting...

No, it makes complete sense - these guys do drivers and such as a marketing exercise. When companies come to them, they want to answer "Yes, we have a driver for you, it's already in the kernel". OEMs are far more likely to choose a company that has drivers already in the kernel than not (and thus need to develop one). And being mainline In the kernel is a quality bar - it's one thing to have a driver to integrate yourself, it's another to have one that's in every kernel going forward.

So a lot of these contributions are "scratching their own itch" where the itch is "sell more of our chips".

This sounds like a metric about as useful as LOC (lines of code) - it favors all those devs who like to make multiple 2 line changes instead of checking in all related files together without breaking a build.